The Wardman Wire

I picked this up from the BBC iPM programme:

You’ve probably read the flurry of press coverage the followed our earlier blog post and the subsequent article in BBC News Online. To recap, exam board AQA removed a poem, Education for Leisure, from a GCSE anthology because of concerns over knife crime.

Firstly. it’s good to see iPM breaking some stories.

A poem - Education for Leisure by Carol Ann Duffy (photo: Guardian) - has been removed from the material examined by an examining board because of the content of the poem. That raises concerns:

• Is it the role of an Exam Board to make “content” decisions?
• Do they have to justify themselves?
• Is the poem actually a problem?
• What are the criteria for these decisions, and are they done consistently?

Education for Leisure by Carol Ann Duffy

Here is the poem:

“Today I am going to kill something. Anything.

I have had enough of being ignored and today

I am going to play God. It is an ordinary day,

a sort of grey with boredom stirring in the streets

I squash a fly against the window with my thumb.

We did that at school. Shakespeare. It was in

another language and now the fly is in another language.

I breathe out talent on the glass to write my name.

I am a genius. I could be anything at all, with half

the chance. But today I am going to change the world.

Something’s world. The cat avoids me. The cat

knows I am a genius, and has hidden itself.

I pour the goldfish down the bog. I pull the chain.

I see that it is good. The budgie is panicking.

Once a fortnight, I walk the two miles into town

For signing on. They don’t appreciate my autograph.

There is nothing left to kill. I dial the radio

and tell the man he’s talking to a superstar.

He cuts me off. I get our bread-knife and go out.

The pavements glitter suddenly. I touch your arm.”

`Education for Leisure’ is taken from `Standing Female Nude’ by Carol Ann Duffy published by Anvil Press Poetry in 1985

We need a Robust Philosophy of Free Expression

I’m concerned with several things here:

1. The “ban it” philosophy that thinks that banning things actually helps anyone in the first place.

2. The “play it safe” philosophy that doesn’t seem to make an especially robust evaluation before caving in to a small number of complaints.

3. Unforgiveably, the fact that the Assessment and Qualifications Authority was not willing to come onto a major news programme (iPM, Radio 4) to defend this action.

4. Our culture which is not clear about what is permitted, and what is not permitted. This poem is banned, but in other areas of our cultural life would be allowed. There is no map, and that leads to capricious decisions and double standards.

I think the poem is mild, and should trigger reflection, which is one of the purposes of poetry in the first place. The reaction from Carol Ann Duffy’s Literary Agent is better than I can write, so I’ll quote it here:

Duffy’s literary agent Peter Strauss said yesterday. “It’s saying, look at what’s been written previously before you criticise this.”

He described the decision to remove Education for Leisure from the syllabus as “absolutely ridiculous. It’s an anti-violence poem. It is a plea for education rather than violence.” The poem, written in the 1980s and studied in schools since, bubbles with the inarticulate rage of a protagonist who kills a fly, then a goldfish, before walking the streets carrying a breadknife.

Mrs Schofield’s GCSE

This is Carol Ann Duffy’s Riposte to Pat Schofield, an external examiner at Lutterworth College, Leicestershire, who complained about the poem and who welcomed the decision to ban a poem she described as “absolutely horrendous”. It was reported in the Guardian.

You must prepare your bosom for his knife,

said Portia to Antonio in which

of Shakespeare’s Comedies? Who killed his wife,

insane with jealousy? And which Scots witch

knew Something wicked this way comes? Who said

Is this a dagger which I see? Which Tragedy?

Whose blade was drawn which led to Tybalt’s death?

To whom did dying Caesar say Et tu? And why?

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark - do you

know what this means? Explain how poetry

pursues the human like the smitten moon

above the weeping, laughing earth; how we

make prayers of it. Nothing will come of nothing:

speak again. Said by which King? You may begin.

Wrapping Up

These days I find myself defending all sorts of things that I don’t agree with - or vehemently oppose - but the bias must be to letting free expression stand. In this case I am flabbergasted that the question of removing the poem from the examined syllabus was even raised.

Where do we go from here? What do you think?

I hope to add a sound snippet to this post later.